When you're free of editorial control, you owe it to yourself to obtain feedback from friends and readers. Some take those criticisms to heart and incorporate it into their work, and some ignore them.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Criticism is part of being in the marketplace. If you can't take a bit of criticism, you shouldn't bother publishing a book.
As authors, we all expect criticism from time to time, and we all have our ways of coping with unfriendly reviews.
I've learned not to attach personal feelings to critics who review your work. It's their opinions, their perceptions - it's a very subjective thing, and you can be hurt.
I can't control the criticism. It's something you certainly don't appreciate, but by the same token, everybody is entitled to their opinion.
Critics have a job to do. I understand that. It's not just to criticize. They're trying to interpret art for the public.
Critics have their purposes, and they're supposed to do what they do, but sometimes they get a little carried away with what they think someone should have done, rather than concerning themselves with what they did.
I personally read criticism - at least by writers I enjoy - to stimulate a conversation in my own mind, and I like to think that's the function I serve for others.
It's not the journalists; it's the critics that I can't understand. I've never understood what kind of a person would want to criticize someone else's work.
Critics can be your most important friend. I don't read criticism of my stuff only because when it's bad, it's rough-and when it's good, it's not good enough.
As much as I encourage communication with my readers, I don't want reviews from them, simply because I don't need to be hamstrung in the middle of working on something.